
[Sponsors] 
October 28, 2013, 07:13 
Local values at BC celexpressions

#1 
New Member
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 5
Rep Power: 6 
Hello,
I got a problem in CFX concerning the use of local values of variables in CELexpressions implemented for boundary conditions. Here are the expressions (local values are red): 1) qRadPt = EmPotat *EmWall *stefan *(Tpotat^4 TavWlRf ^4)*1 2) qRadWlRf = EmPotat *EmWall *stefan *(TavPt^4 T^4)*1 These expressions introduce a crude model of radiative heat transfer between surface of porous domain (T of solid porous body is represented with additional variable Tpotat, average value: areaAve(Tpotat)@IA_Pt Side 2) and wall/roof surface (T average value=TavWlRf). I set these expressions as boundary fluxes: 1) for additional variable Tpotat; 2) for energy Eqn on wall/roof surface. Initial conditions were set with resfile containing physically reliable solution of natural convection and conduction. During solver run overflow happened (in ~20 iterations). My investigation revealed that both surfaces undergo abnormal radiation heating from the very start of run. So, both Tpotat and T went to plus infinity. Then I checked all expressions several times and found no mistakes. I made modification of the expressions in the way that both radiative fluxes were calculated on the basis of only average values. The result is normal (eqns are OK!), but the surface distribution of Tpotat is not uniform and I still need to take into consideration its local values. Several days later idea came to me: In both expressions solver used zero K instead of real local temperature (Tpotat and T respectively)! I found no related info in CFX help and at web too. My question is how to construct expression or what option to check in order to make CFXsolver properly evaluate expressions with local values of variables. Thanks in advance for reply! 

October 28, 2013, 09:43 

#2 
Senior Member
Edmund Singer P.E.
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Posts: 512
Rep Power: 14 
Not sure i understand. Did you redefine T? That is a inherent variable.
Why do you need to use Tpotat if you just want the local T? Cant you just use T? Also these numbers will be a function of each other, and perhaps CFX isnt able to dampen the solution out on the walls until it becomes steady. Perhaps you can add a min,max on the outside to cap the q that will be transfered so that a steady solution could be more easily reached. 

October 28, 2013, 15:11 

#3  
New Member
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 5
Rep Power: 6 
Quote:
Radiation models in CFX (DTM etc) can calculate radiative fluxes only on the basis of inherent variable T for temperature. For my case it means taking into account temperature of air passing through pieces of product (T) instead of temperature of product (Tpotat). That is why I have to use CELexpressions to model radiation HT. Quote:
The reason of rising both T and Tpotat to plus infinity on surfaces under radiation HT is in improper evaluation of CELexpressions during solver run. As I mentioned above, replacing of local values (red coloured in first post) with areaaveraged values helped to get solution. But since the temperature distribution both on product surface and wall/roof surface is not reasonably uniform, I still need to find a way to use CELexpressions with local values. I mean, expression for product surface should contain local value of Tpotat (expression for wall/roof surface  local value of its T). 

October 29, 2013, 00:18 

#4 
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 461
Rep Power: 11 
The problem may be with 4 power of Temperature and BC dependent on solution. I had the same problem when tried to model radiative HF from nozzle wall. Initialy I used Heat Flux option for BC with Heat Flux in = eps*stefan*T^4 and there was error. So I switched to Heat Transfer Coef option with Coef = eps*stefan*T^3. Although in my case external temperature is zero, I think you may try to utilize such approach, but maybe with help of User Fortran. At the moment I solve problem where boundary flux depends exponentially on solution. Setting it through Flux In option (even using User Fortran) leading to overflow issue. So I had to switch to Transfer Coef option and calculate Coef and external value in my fortran routine to overcome it. In your case I think for qRadPt you'll get: Coef = EmPotat *EmWall *stefan * 4 * Tpotat^3, Ext value = Tpotat + EmPotat *EmWall *stefan *(Tpotat^4 TavWlRf ^4)*1 / Coef. At least for my current problem such approach works.


October 29, 2013, 11:50 
Thank you

#5  
New Member
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 5
Rep Power: 6 
Thanks a lot, Antanas!
In a few days I will be able to test your idea in CFX. Quote:


October 29, 2013, 13:41 

#6  
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 461
Rep Power: 11 
Quote:
So we have EmPotat *EmWall *stefan *(Tpotat^4 TavWlRf ^4)*1 = Coef * (Tpotat  Text), and if we differentiate left and right by Tpotat, we get: EmPotat *EmWall *stefan * 4 * Tpotat^3 = Coef. Next for external temperature we have Text = Tpotat  qRadPt / Coef. You can make sure that these Coef and Text will give you the same flux. I'm not sure that you'll be able to realize this through CEL, but with User Fortran I had no problem. Last edited by Antanas; October 29, 2013 at 23:20. 

October 30, 2013, 14:49 

#7  
New Member
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 5
Rep Power: 6 
Quote:
Quote:
I think that expression for Coef affects only numerical stability. And we can utilize any expression. It becomes obvious when we put Text = Tpotat  qRadPt / Coef to qRadPt = Coef * (Tpotat  Text). The only requirement is to avoid division by Coef = 0. So my plan is to try expressions for Coef with a power of Tpotat from 3 to 1 until I get proper result. 

October 31, 2013, 11:50 
Solved

#8 
New Member
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 5
Rep Power: 6 
I followed Antanas' recommendation and got proper result. But I tried my own variant of Coef. I thought the best is to take Tpotat in the power of 0. So I used Coef = 1 and succeeded.
Also I found there is no possibility to implement such BC on interfaces of wall and roof. Only Flux and Total Source could be chosen for Energy equation. May be it is possible to use Coef and Text via User Fortran. But I analyzed my problem and understood that there is no need to utilize such approach for wall/roof surfaces. 

Tags 
cel expression, local value 
Thread Tools  
Display Modes  


Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
pisoFoam with kepsilon turb blows up  Some questions  Heroic  OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD  26  December 17, 2012 04:34 
Upgraded from Karmic Koala 9.10 to Lucid Lynx10.04.3  bookie56  OpenFOAM Installation  8  August 13, 2011 04:03 
Time Step and CEL expressions for Mesh Deformation  rbarrett  CFX  3  July 6, 2011 10:13 
ATTENTION! Reliability problems in CFX 5.7  Joseph  CFX  14  April 20, 2010 15:45 
Calling CEL values in FORTRAN  Rob  CFX  3  January 19, 2007 10:38 